It's been a few days since we brought this into your lives, explaining how a road.cc reader had invented a "third type" of cycling shoe, a "walkable cleat" to enable riders to keep using their road pedals and cleats but also be able to walk freely as if using a mountain bike set-up.
Hugo told us he'd been working on it for 10 years and has so far tried and failed to engage any brand to take him up on his design, aimed at asking: "Why do millions of cyclists have to walk like ducks?"
Well, needless to say it got plenty of attention (and comments), Hugo now telling us that while he accepts the comments were "more 'no' than 'yes'", he has not been discouraged and will continue his quest.
As we alluded to in the piece, one of the most often heard replies from the cycling public was from those who just can't understand why, if your priority is being able to walk freely and you've gone to the trouble of creating several designs (pictured throughout), he is so keen to ditch mountain bike pedals and cleats, the set-up he had ridden for the past 30 years.
Jon Hughes called the idea "bizarre" and suggested: "If you need to do a lot of walking then don’t use road cleats. Problem solved."
Jock DeBoer: "So basically a mountain bike shoe."
Secret_squirrel: "This is solution looking for a problem. These do nothing that you can't get from a MTB SPD shoe. If you are worried about pedal surface area then you include a more platform style MTB pedal. I use Hope Union Trail pedals across all my bikes Road or Offroad as they have a small-med sized platform. It also means my waterproof SPD boots double as winter road shoes with no messing about with overshoes."
ubercurmudgeon: "If hot-gluing pencil erasers to the bottoms of his shoes makes it easier for him to walk in cafe stops, then all power to him. But I'm not sure there is a commercial product here."
It's at this point I'm again left ruing the fact Sidi, the brand Hugo has bought for his entire cycling life, opted out of offering up a product designer for interview or getting involved with the piece...
Anyway, in true comments section style, there was plenty of fun to be had away from the more earnest discussion, starting with Nick T who hopes Hugo will turn his attention to diving flippers next and "finds a way to make them less cumbersome to walk in"... tough gig, that one... not that it's deterred a few brands that pop up in a quick eBay search.
Adam Simmonite wondered if it's the branding of the "walkable cleat" that could be tweaked for major industry buy-in... "Stick the word 'gravel' in the pitch and they'll be the next big thing."
Ironically, Hugo told us a former Ritchey employee had apparently said his design looked like the "perfect" gravel shoe.
Dandi: "When you've got interval training at 6am and a Sunday league kick-off at 8am."
And finally...
Regardless of if you think they'd work as an industry-wide product, I'm keeping my fingers crossed Hugo can finally find a solution he's happy with... even if it takes a bit more badgering brands to create him a few pairs just for himself... and we'll of course let you know if they do...
Add new comment
35 comments
Cyclist/taxi/fire engine: why didn't the taxi driver – and the cyclist – pull into the parking spaces that we see unoccupied on the left? That would have been the best way for both to let the fire engine pass and then carry on with their journeys.
IMO Cycling Mikey has this essentially spot on, as usual.
The complaining Cammer afaics had plenty of time to slow down himself in the 1st part of the clip, but chose to overtake another person riding a bike whilst the siren was approaching, which meant he got into conflict with the taxi later.
Even so, there was time for him to pass the taxi on the left, if we wanted.
Mr Toad gets a bicycle. Poop poop !
I think, provided that it isn't dangerous to do so, drivers should be allowed to move into areas that they aren't normally allowed into for the purpose of letting emergency vehicles through.
It also baffles me that it isn't a criminal offenst to not let emergency vehicles through. I think it should be.
Cabbie is probably technically wrong but the cyclist could hear the sirens approaching from behind for well over 10 seconds. He didn't slow or move left and even continued to overtake other cyclists. He failed to anticipate the possibility of the taxi moving left to let the fire engine by too. That says all I need to know about his poor roadcraft and lack of hazard perception unfortunately.
When I'm cycling and hear a siren (or see the flashing lights behind me), I usually stop and go onto the pavement and be careful of drivers possibly mounting the pavement to give the emergency vehicle space. I don't think I've ever been using a cycle lane in that kind of circumstance, but I suppose that I'd be tempted to continue riding if it's got a kerb, but I'd pull over if not.
I haven't watched the video, but it sounds like the taxi driver wasn't particularly dangerous, but just caused a minor hazard for the cyclist and the cyclist should have just waited behind the taxi.
With emergency services, the usual rules of the road are often ignored so just get into a safe position, ideally where it's clear that you're waiting for the vehicle to get past, and then continue afterwards.
Wonder if cyclist wearing noise cancelling ear buds. I keep going amazed at number of cyclists who seem oblivious of other cyclists, let alone other road users and pedestrians
When there's an emergency vehicle approaching and I'm on the bike, I will get out of the way ASAP.
In the car, it's sometimes better to keep moving for a while (twisty road with double white lines and no safe passing place). But on a bicycle, it's usually possible to stop, even dismount and completely step off the road, before the emergency vehicle gets anywhere near.
I will make a point of looking at the emergency vehicle driver, so they can be sure I've seen them and are waiting for them. The sooner I can remove myself from their list of potential hazards, the better.
That's what I try to do too. As a bonus you get to stand on the pavement watching all the idiot drivers swerving around like headless chickens actually making progress far harder for the emergency vehicle.
It helps to imagine it is on the way to help the person you care most about, although for a lot of drivers that would be themselves so I guess their confusion is understandable.
No wonder other road users have such a poor opinion of bicycle users. I cycle a lot in London. The only sensible response to blues and twos is to locate the source and then get out the way. No matter what vehicle you are in. Taxi driver did the right thing. The person on the bike needs to reconsider his life choices.
On the Millbank cyclist/taxi/fire engine clip I think the Taxi driver was fine when letting the fire engine past.
It's frustrating that where Millbank is really wide, so much is used up by parking and a pointlessly big central reservation. Take those out there is room for a good segregated cycle lane, a bus lane, and a general traffic lane in each direction. Hopefully TfL might get round to this in the next few years.
On the cyclist/taxi clip - one thing that it highlights to me is that even in the heart of London, on a nice, wide stretch of road, the cycling infrastructure is actually pretty crap. All cyclists get is a narrow strip of blue tarmac (not wide enough to safely overtake), some paint, and a handful of sporadic wands. The "mandatory" cycle lane is necessarily driven over by buses and other motor vehicles using the bus stops and parking bays. It also appears that the road layout has prioritised a central reservation that (as far as I can tell) exists purely to stop drivers carrying out illegal manoeuvres.
Looks like a "cycling superhypeway" to me!
TBF even in NL you can still find cycle lanes on-road *. BUT they have actual cycle networks so often there might be a nearby excellent alternative!
I believe in NL they're often looking to upgrade this kind of thing to either cycle paths or - quite often - to make the street a "bicycle street". In addition in such places generally the speed limits are low and motor traffic may be less.
Finally I believe a majority of drivers have got the message there. Still not all though - pointing to the fact that where there is still "mass motoring" we will probably need to build "cycle infra".
* Cycle lanes not necessarily with "protection" either. Ultimately I think that's the right way to go as that's just another thing for people to ride into / trip over on. Unfortunately in the UK drivers have got used to being able to drive and leave their vehicles everywhere with effectively zero consequences. So we do need physical measures (and ideally more "policing") to strongly discourage this.
The cycle lane at the north (Lambeth bridge) end isn't too bad and is as wide as it could be given the width of the road (though the southbound lane has got a little rough now).
When the road widens and the buses cut across the lane to the bus stop is poor and needs a whole redesign.
In this case, most obvious thing for cyclist to do is stop and move over. Like many comments here say and I've done - we get loads of blue lights as we're very close to ambulance station and big hospitals - and I've benefited following heart attack with 3 resuscitations on front driveway in 2020
Technically the cab driver is in the wrong, not actually allowed to cross the solid white line in that situation, but every commonsense principle says that they did the right thing and did it well, indicating, not pulling sharply into the lane or anything else. Really feel quite embarrassed for that cyclist, making a fuss for no reason whatsoever. In emergency situations seconds count, perhaps he needs to ask himself how he would feel if his children were trapped in a burning house and the fire engine was delayed because a taxi refused to get out of its way by sticking to the letter of the law (and it would have caused a serious delay by doing so, if I'm not mistaken that video is taken going westbound on Millbank, the solid white line runs all the way to Vauxhall Bridge from there and it's a 20 mph limit, so the fire engine would've had to slow to 20 mph for about half a mile)? He could then further ask himself why the hell with an emergency vehicle approaching he didn't slow down and move over? Really quite infuriating and pathetic and by posting it not only makes a fool of himself but hands ammunition on a plate to the anti-cycling brigade.
Technically there is an exemption to the laws re crossing solid white lines for access, which would apply here for accessing the parking bays.
Arguably technically the taxi should either stop and let the fire engine use the bays + cycle lane to pass, or pull fully across the cycle lane into said bays.
In practice both still leave the rider needing to stop - one to allow the taxi to cross their path and the other to allow the fire engine to cross path.
Rather than predicting the completely predictable hazard from blue lights approaching from behind, the rider decided to overtake another rider in front of them (going from cycle lane to main carriageway and so risking blocking the fire engine themselves) reducing the margin of error for people panicing about getting out of the fire engines way...
Yep, I was going to say - not only would I have no issue with the taxi in that situation, I also wouldn't have overtaken the cyclist in front of me. No situational awareness.
For me it depends if the taxi driver saw the fire engine, but did the overtake & pull in anyway.
I agree it's not one to get het up about but like what was wrong with the cycle lane space behind the cyclist ?
Agree with all of your points and you're correct it's on Millbank approaching Vauxhall Bridge.
Only wanted to say that the lane splits into two very shortly after fire engine passes. It becomes a regular lane on the right and a bus lane on the left, which the taxi driver is allowed to use at all times anyway. And the cycle lane merges into the bus lane. So even in the most obstructive scenario it'd only be 50-100m or so before there's a whole extra lane for an emergency vehicle. They'd then of course have to deal with potentially a large amount of stationary traffic at Vauxhall Bridge but that's another matter.
But yes, there were multiple decision points to easily avoid throwing your hands up in mock surprise at what happened.
With regards to the clip posted by CyclingMikey...
The priority for everyone in this situation is for the road users (cyclist and taxi driver) to let the emergency vehicle past as soon as possible, in a safe manner.
In this situation, I think there were two options:
1) As seen in the video, the taxi driver pulls into the cycle lane and at no point puts the cyclist at risk as the cyclist themselves should have been slowing when hearing the siren.
This is ultimately the best way for the emergency vehicle to continue at speed.
2) The cyclist could have pulled to the far left and maybe stopped next to the pavement to allow the vehicle past using the cycle lane without the taxi driver needing to change direction.
This would have been slightly tricker for the driver of the emergency services vehicle as it is less usual for any driver to undertake another and if the taxi driver had pulled to the left at the last moment a collision could have occurred.
If there have been prosecutions for drivers safely entering areas that are normally restricted to allow emergency vehicles past, then ultimately I think there needs to be a change in the law to allow this so everyone is clear on what is OK.
If the cycle lane had been two way it could have worked like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70cuuTewga8
or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncH3j7Lto2c
I think it's mostly ANPR fines for moving into a bus lanes rather than prosecutions - for an prosecution I would imagine it would have to be something like pulling dangerously into someone else's path to get out the way and/or actually causing a collision.
I don't see a bug prob with letting the ANPR bus lane fines stand, because clearly the best approach is to leave the bus lane clear for the emergency vehicle if they want to use it ... and there's plenty of folk who will just use the excuse of a blue light to dodge into a bus lane for their own benefit, just like the ones who tailgate emergency vehicles through lights / junctions etc
It's clearly utter lack of sense to object to what this tax driver did though - calm, safely observed, timed and indicated, brief stopover to let the vehicle pass, and then moved back out again.
I don't agree that the cyclist should have been "slowing down" to let the fire engine past though - fire engine can pass in the main lane quite safely without cyclists on the cycle lane needing to stop/slow. I'd just carry on, but I would also assume the taxi would be pulling in - and I'd be checking carefully at any junctions, and probably slow or stop just in case it needs to take a turn across my path ... I'd rather they didn't have to wait for me to clear.
I'd respectfully disagree with that, I always slow down and pull over as close to the kerb as possible for emergency vehicles, stopping as you rightly suggest if there are any turns or junctions they might need to negotiate ahead. The reason I do that is I feel that by slowing down and moving over, even if there is enough room for them to pass without me doing so, it lets the driver know that I've registered that they are coming and that I'm not going to do anything stupid or panicked as they pass. Just trying to do a little bit to help by giving them one less thing to watch out for.
The taxi driver certainly did the right thing — caring for others, giving way, and possibly helping to save lives. Rigidly sticking to the letter of the highway code instead of using common sense and compassion seems like a recipe for traffic fatalities.
Unfortunately, the original poster of that video appears to display a sense of entitlement that we usually criticize in the most unpleasant types of drivers.
It's all well and good, however, read both the second paragraph of HC219, and the Ambulance Service advice again.
In other words, don't swing in and brake sharp, look to see the lane is empty, including behind you before moving in to a bike/bus lane to let them pass.
The Taxi driver swung in and hit the brakes fairly hard. If there is an obstruction or pinch point ahead, then he should have stayed in lane until after the obstruction. If not, he should have slowed down more gently in order to give the cyclist enough time to take a tea break before having to react.
They really didn't either swing or hit the brakes hard, they were already going slowly and clearly indicated while the cyclist was a good distance away, moving across smoothly and very slowly into the cycle lane; in any case the cyclist should have been anticipating that the taxi was going to have to move. This tea break they should've left the cyclist enough time to have, are we talking just a cuppa or are we throwing in biscuits and sandwiches?
"Could you refresh the pot?"
It only looks like he swung in and breaked sharply because of the field of view from the camera and the fact this cyclist decided to try riding at their normal pace, despite knowing a blue-lit vehicle was approaching and there was traffic ahead which would likely pull over to let the fire engine pass. To me this is simple entitlement from the cyclist and does all of us a disservice.
I also suspect he may have carried on riding as he did to garner a video for social media.
Simply didn't swing in and hit brakes hard. And only going 20mph
I've got no problem with a driver pulling into a cycle lane to let an emergency vehicle pass.
(I do, however, have a problem when they MGIF first, which I have experienced.)
Might need to update your post from 09:16. Junior womens race has now finished.
Pages